If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Ran from the other thread? I've run from nothing. There comes a point in any discussion where repeating and rehashing the same things are useless. Its either you dont understand or you dont want to understand. I'm not going to blow a corpuscle trying to explain it to you, over and over and over again.

You've been asking me the same question for two weeks. So show some intelligence and figure it out for yourself. I'll give you some options.

a) I feel I answered your question
b) I dont have an answer
c) You dont understand the point being made
d) You're an idiot

Choose one. Hell choose 2, 3 or all of the above just move on.

I notice you still haven't presented any dispute on TODAY'S topic. Cat got your tongue?

Why should I have to be the one to start the open discussion when you ran from your posts and assertions?

Where was the point in the other discussion when you backed up the following assertion: "I stated only facts." in reference to your coach-player-confidence algorithm. Which post was that, where you explained how you arrived at said "facts"? How you arrived at said numbers? Under what "factual basis" beyond your own opinion and guessing did you come with to explain why you got 60%, and not 50%, or 40%, or 62.4%, or 53.1%?

If you answer these questions, and prove you are willing to engage in debate and actually listen to the other side of the argument (which you proved you are not willing to do), I will engage you. Otherwise, it's a waste of time.

But in reference to at least a couple of your points, just to throw you a bone, seeing as your pathetic ass is too scared to admit in the other thread you were wrong, like a man would do:

You say we have drawn five charges by stepping into the lane. Now, you don't present anything factual to show that (just your own guess at a number), but let's assume it is five. Last year, Jeffries was drawing those types of fouls out the ass. Does that not prove, then, that the players, not necessarily the coach, have more to do with what type of defense is being played?

You also state you do not "see" a defensive philosophy. I am unaware of how you can "see" an idea, but let me tell you what I see. I see D'Antoni encouraging his guys to get back on defense and ball stop, I see a team that is getting a lot of blocks and attempting to hammer guys inside, especially when Turiaf is on the floor. But again, you refuse to watch videos or learn about the team, you continue to operate with a glass of knowledge a quarter full, and you don't care about smartening up, as you admit yourself.

I am unclear how a total lack of "defensive effort" is solely the coach's fault and not the fault of the players in any way. Fact is, it is ultimately up to the guys on the floor if they elect to play defense, or even "try" as you claim they do not. You think D'Antoni would bench a guy for stopping the ball on a drive? Or would bench a guy for grabbing too many rebounds or getting too many blocks? The lack of effort to me is mostly on the players.

The rebounding is piss poor, but it is piss poor at a level to where the basics aren't even being executed. That to me is indicative of player, not coach, issues. A coach should not have to teach you how to box out, a coach should not have to tell you to grab the ball and pull it in immediately rather than try to tip it. This isn't even high school stuff, it's middle school level, and the fact that we don't do that to me seems indicative of a player problem, not a coaching problem.

You see a blatant disregard for using our bigs. I see a guy in Mozgov who started early in the year, and was not good. I see a team with now literally 2 legitimate big men, Turiaf and Mozgov. Our other "big" (Anthony Randolph) elects to take 20 foot air-ball jumpers whenever he sees action rather than focusing on getting open near the basket. I see a coach that started the season attempting to use a 10-man rotation and we struggled early on, and the coach adjusted (as you have said he hasn't). If he wasn't able to adjust we would have kept the 10-man rotation and not won games.

I addressed many of your points...now do me a favor and upfront address mine, or get out.

Why should I have to be the one to start the open discussion when you ran from your posts and assertions?

Where was the point in the other discussion when you backed up the following assertion: "I stated only facts." in reference to your coach-player-confidence algorithm. Which post was that, where you explained how you arrived at said "facts"? How you arrived at said numbers? Under what "factual basis" beyond your own opinion and guessing did you come with to explain why you got 60%, and not 50%, or 40%, or 62.4%, or 53.1%?

If you answer these questions, and prove you are willing to engage in debate and actually listen to the other side of the argument (which you proved you are not willing to do), I will engage you. Otherwise, it's a waste of time.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

But in reference to at least a couple of your points, just to throw you a bone, seeing as your pathetic ass is too scared to admit in the other thread you were wrong, like a man would do:

I was wrong in the other thread? I gave you all you needed to understand the point I was making. Actions. Watch what MDA did/does with Moz. You can basically come to your own HONEST conclusions.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

You say we have drawn five charges by stepping into the lane. Now, you don't present anything factual to show that (just your own guess at a number), but let's assume it is five. Last year, Jeffries was drawing those types of fouls out the ass. Does that not prove, then, that the players, not necessarily the coach, have more to do with what type of defense is being played?

I played basketball. Some players wouldnt take a charge unless it was practiced, almost on a daily basis. It had to be almost beaten in them. Some you didnt have to tell twice. They'd step in front of a freight train. Which type of player do you think Jeffries is if what you say is true? If our coach accepts what the players are doing they'll continue to do it.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

You also state you do not "see" a defensive philosophy. I am unaware of how you can "see" an idea, but let me tell you what I see. I see D'Antoni encouraging his guys to get back on defense and ball stop, I see a team that is getting a lot of blocks and attempting to hammer guys inside, especially when Turiaf is on the floor. But again, you refuse to watch videos or learn about the team, you continue to operate with a glass of knowledge a quarter full, and you don't care about smartening up, as you admit yourself.

Hammer who? I havent seen it. Dude we're a finesse team. We dont have a edict like the old Knicks, NO LAYUPS. What exactly are you watching? Barea, Nash, Kobe, Iggy are just some of the players getting to the rim on us like they had an invite. The blocks are nice, but they're because of our overall team athleticism. If you add a scheme and some teaching we'd be much better.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

I am unclear how a total lack of "defensive effort" is solely the coach's fault and not the fault of the players in any way. Fact is, it is ultimately up to the guys on the floor if they elect to play defense, or even "try" as you claim they do not. You think D'Antoni would bench a guy for stopping the ball on a drive? Or would bench a guy for grabbing too many rebounds or getting too many blocks? The lack of effort to me is mostly on the players.

WOW! Just WOW! The NBA has had players who were known as defensive liabilities throughout the history of the game. They played on bad defensive teams, or played for coaches that didnt care if that particular player played defense. Some of these players have been traded to teams that concentrate on defense. Teach defense. Have a defensive philosophy. Just by association they became BETTER defenders. They were taught. They learned. They gave an effort. Hell the Knicks have had two that I can remember right now. Earl Monroe and Larry Johnson. Now dont go getting your panties in a bunch and think that I'm saying they made first team all defense. That didnt happen. But they IMPROVED.

One more thing. Does MDA's track record mean anything at all to you? The fact that he never coached an effective defensive team. The fact that he was fired because top brass felt he didnt have his team concentrate enough on the defensive end. None of this raises a red flag for you when you try to pin our defensive deficiencies on our players?

Originally Posted by KBlack25

The rebounding is piss poor, but it is piss poor at a level to where the basics aren't even being executed. That to me is indicative of player, not coach, issues. A coach should not have to teach you how to box out, a coach should not have to tell you to grab the ball and pull it in immediately rather than try to tip it. This isn't even high school stuff, it's middle school level, and the fact that we don't do that to me seems indicative of a player problem, not a coaching problem.

Although I didnt mention rebounding, I'll give you my thoughts. Rebounding is a skill. You have to like contact to rebound effectively game in game out. Length helps. But hey we werent using any length for almost two months. Being out rebounded should have been expected.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

You see a blatant disregard for using our bigs. I see a guy in Mozgov who started early in the year, and was not good. I see a team with now literally 2 legitimate big men, Turiaf and Mozgov. Our other "big" (Anthony Randolph) elects to take 20 foot air-ball jumpers whenever he sees action rather than focusing on getting open near the basket. I see a coach that started the season attempting to use a 10-man rotation and we struggled early on, and the coach adjusted (as you have said he hasn't). If he wasn't able to adjust we would have kept the 10-man rotation and not won games.

You know that you're wrong about Moz, at least you should. I dont want to get into that anymore. But AR? I watched him get some garbage minutes recently. MDA has ruined this kids confidence. One particular play stood out to me. I dont know if anyone else noticed. He had the ball in the corner. Absolutely no one between him and the rim. I'm thinking he's going in for the dunk. He takes a THREE. WHY you might ask? IMHO it's to impress the idiot coach. This kid is screwed playing for this coach.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

I addressed many of your points...now do me a favor and upfront address mine, or get out.

WOW! Just WOW! The NBA has had players who were known as defensive liabilities throughout the history of the game. They played on bad defensive teams, or played for coaches that didnt care if that particular player played defense. Some of these players have been traded to teams that concentrate on defense. Teach defense. Have a defensive philosophy. Just by association they became BETTER defenders. They were taught. They learned. They gave an effort. Hell the Knicks have had two that I can remember right now. Earl Monroe and Larry Johnson. Now dont go getting your panties in a bunch and think that I'm saying they made first team all defense. That didnt happen. But they IMPROVED.

Excellent point Clyde, could not agree more. Some players are already defensively inclined straight out of college you don't have to teach them much, but others you need to keep drilling to get the defensive effort out of them. These players are more accustomed to playing an offensive role on the teams they've played on, it doesn't come instinctually for them. I've seen Nate Robinson putting forth much more effort on defense playing as a Celtic than he ever did as a Knick, it points to pretty obvious coaching philosophy differences between D'Antoni and Rivers. I think the same could be said about Ray Allen compared to his days as a Supersonic.

Although I didnt mention rebounding, I'll give you my thoughts. Rebounding is a skill. You have to like contact to rebound effectively game in game out. Length helps. But hey we werent using any length for almost two months. Being out rebounded should have been expected.

You know that you're wrong about Moz, at least you should. I dont want to get into that anymore. But AR? I watched him get some garbage minutes recently. MDA has ruined this kids confidence. One particular play stood out to me. I dont know if anyone else noticed. He had the ball in the corner. Absolutely no one between him and the rim. I'm thinking he's going in for the dunk. He takes a THREE. WHY you might ask? IMHO it's to impress the idiot coach. This kid is screwed playing for this coach.

Agreed 100%. D'Antoni has consistently refused to play Anthony Randolph who is probably our best rebounder off the bench in anything other than garbage minutes in blowout losses and yet he's running Timo Mozgov out there on a nightly basis who doesn't even know how to box out for rebounds. It just doesn't make any sense at all. I honestly don't see what he sees in Timo, to me he's pretty limited talent wise at the age of 24 I would expect his game to be a lot more developed than it is right now. Randolph has already shown flashes of brilliance at the age of 19 and 20 putting up impressive statlines along the way, I don't understand how you leave a guy like that on the bench while guys like Bill Walker and Timo Mozgov get burn. I also agree about his confidence being shot now, when you only get run in garbage time I don't see what anyone can expect to see out of any player, Anthony Randolph or otherwise.

You did not provide anything credible to support your points. No articles, numbers, or specific moments in a game.

Basically all your post says is your opinion = right no matter what.

For example:

When we were pointing out bad defensive teams that won a blue chip, we both worked with data.

In the end even though I provided the data I mis-interpreted and mis-presented it and I was pretty much wrong in that discussion. You took that data and presented it in a different way. You were right.

I read an article in the NY Post about how we should be concentrating on Dwight Howard and not Anthony. One interesting quote from the article came from Amar'e who said they focus so much on offense that they hve a hard time finding the impetus to play defense....

This is my whole problem with D'antoni's system. They have no defensive scheme, besides funnel baseline. They were taught no discipline to rotate accordingly and they are to exhausted to make an effort otherwise.

I played basketball. Some players wouldnt take a charge unless it was practiced, almost on a daily basis. It had to be almost beaten in them. Some you didnt have to tell twice. They'd step in front of a freight train. Which type of player do you think Jeffries is if what you say is true? If our coach accepts what the players are doing they'll continue to do it.

I played hoops as well, I understand sometimes guys need certain things hammered into their heads. But isn't all of that just even more indicative of the fact that it is more the personnel and less the coaching that has to deal with taking charges? Some people WILL just take charges, we are a team without a roster of guys who will take charges, to me that is indicative of player personnel. But again, as Blas states, this is all opinion.

Originally Posted by Clyde& The Pearl

Hammer who? I havent seen it. Dude we're a finesse team. We dont have a edict like the old Knicks, NO LAYUPS. What exactly are you watching? Barea, Nash, Kobe, Iggy are just some of the players getting to the rim on us like they had an invite. The blocks are nice, but they're because of our overall team athleticism. If you add a scheme and some teaching we'd be much better.

My question is how do you know there isn't teaching? Are you in practice? You state "Follow The Actions" (which apparently is explanatory of your 60%, 80% statistical output as fact...still waiting on how it is fact, by the way), but you can't even do that yourself. You have stated yourself you are unwilling to watch videos where D'Antoni preaches defenses, where he organizes the team defensively. I don't know why you refuse and "don't want to/care about" increasing your knowledge and understanding of the team. But I see it. And Turiaf is a hard nosed player. But right now we have no other guys that are hard nosed, except on the offensive end. Again, an issue of ROSTER not coaching. I have seen Turiaf hammer guys in the paint. But STAT has always been soft (even with Gentry at the helm) on the defensive end.

Originally Posted by Clyde & The Pearl

WOW! Just WOW! The NBA has had players who were known as defensive liabilities throughout the history of the game. They played on bad defensive teams, or played for coaches that didnt care if that particular player played defense. Some of these players have been traded to teams that concentrate on defense. Teach defense. Have a defensive philosophy. Just by association they became BETTER defenders. They were taught. They learned. They gave an effort. Hell the Knicks have had two that I can remember right now. Earl Monroe and Larry Johnson. Now dont go getting your panties in a bunch and think that I'm saying they made first team all defense. That didnt happen. But they IMPROVED.

One more thing. Does MDA's track record mean anything at all to you? The fact that he never coached an effective defensive team. The fact that he was fired because top brass felt he didnt have his team concentrate enough on the defensive end. None of this raises a red flag for you when you try to pin our defensive deficiencies on our players?

By what metric has he never coached a good "defensive team"? I don't follow points allowed per game (though it is the standard measure for the clinically misinformed), I like points per 100 possessions. D'Antoni has us about in the middle of the pack, as I stated in another thread there are a bunch of teams packed in the middle with that stat, we are not incredibly worse than Atlanta in points per possession, a team with a much better defensive/rebounding front court than we have.

In his first full season with PHX, they were 17th in PA/100P (Points Allowed Per 100 Possessions), 16th in 2005-06, 13th in 2006-07, 16th in 2007-08. Those are his years with Phoenix. Am I going to say he is a top notch defensive coach? Of course not. But his teams were all pretty average, not piss-poor as many would have us believe. Admittedly, his last 2 years with NY were horrible on the defensive front per 100, but I find it really difficult to take any statistics or numbers (ANY of them) from those years without an enormous grain of salt.

As you said, the blocks are nice, we get a bunch every game. Unfortunately there is no blocks per 100 possessions metric that I know of, but I bet we still would be we are at the top. I bet you would say it is the PLAYERS who have something to say about it, not coach.

Originally Posted by Clyde & The Pearl

You know that you're wrong about Moz, at least you should. I dont want to get into that anymore. But AR? I watched him get some garbage minutes recently. MDA has ruined this kids confidence. One particular play stood out to me. I dont know if anyone else noticed. He had the ball in the corner. Absolutely no one between him and the rim. I'm thinking he's going in for the dunk. He takes a THREE. WHY you might ask? IMHO it's to impress the idiot coach. This kid is screwed playing for this coach.

Coach would not have been impressed with a drive and the slam? Be serious...As a player you have to know what you can and cannot do. AR taking stupid jumpers is not a product of lost confidence, the kid was doing the same in the pre-season, before any long-term benching occurred. There was even a thread here in the preseason DEDICATED to AR's shot selection. Moz, on the other hand, has created a game around getting open under the hoop and trying (albeit poorly) to grab a rebound. You know what this tells me? The coaching staff has made it possible for a guy to get minutes while doing this.

AR needs to wise up. Maybe it's that stupid face he makes. Maybe it's the fact that when there is a huddle and Moz is first off the bench and involved and AR is starting at the camera, not paying attention. Maybe it's that he never ever looks happy, even if the team is winning. But I just think this kid, to me, seems like a big-time brat.

What this board breaks down to is that:

You (and others) are more likely to blame the coach for struggles, period.

I (and others) am more likely to blame the players for struggles, period.

The two opinions are diametrically opposed, you will never convince me that a coach has more affect on the game than the players do themselves. Clearly, I will never convince you the players have more affect than the coach. I think that blaming a coach for struggles is as misplaced as giving him a ton of credit for success. If only some wise person had thought of and realized this idea previously:

You did not provide anything credible to support your points. No articles, numbers, or specific moments in a game.

Basically all your post says is your opinion = right no matter what.

For example:

When we were pointing out bad defensive teams that won a blue chip, we both worked with data.

In the end even though I provided the data I mis-interpreted and mis-presented it and I was pretty much wrong in that discussion. You took that data and presented it in a different way. You were right.

I vehmently disagree with KBlack on ponts per possession. PPG and the point differential are what matters. The kncks pace creates more possessions, which means their opponents would have higher point per game. That's a given. The problem, is that we don't play defense so when we win games it creates an average point differential of .40. Not good. Meaning we are winning by the skin of our teeth. That = lack of defense. I am ok if other teams score 106 and we score 112. The point differential shows we are playing D. With the same number of possessions we consistently win.

.40 shows we are just trying to outscore the other team.

Look at Amar'e's quote in the above article. That helps to explain why I dislike D'Antoni's system.

I vehmently disagree with KBlack on ponts per possession. PPG and the point differential are what matters. The kncks pace creates more possessions, which means their opponents would have higher point per game. That's a given. The problem, is that we don't play defense so when we win games it creates an average point differential of .40. Not good. Meaning we are winning by the skin of our teeth. That = lack of defense. I am ok if other teams score 106 and we score 112. The point differential shows we are playing D. With the same number of possessions we consistently win.

.40 shows we are just trying to outscore the other team.

Look at Amar'e's quote in the above article. That helps to explain why I dislike D'Antoni's system.

If you admit that a team with more possessions will score more points per game, how can that mean that points per game is a good metric for the purposes of comparison across teams? The points per game stat is fundamentally flawed because all it tells is how many points a team scored in 48 minutes, does not adequately (or at all) factor in that teams may go to OT, inevitably scoring more points, does not factor in the pace, that a team may be getting a lot of quick looks, creating more possessions creating more points.

You admit that PPG does not factor in the fact that a team with more possessions (read: a faster game) necessarily will score more points. How, then, is that number not flawed? Sorry, I just can't seriously take opinions if you really buy that PPG is a good or relevant stat for comparison purposes.

Also, I am unclear as to how, when we win games, that we win them by an average of .4 points, as you assert?

Excellent point Clyde, could not agree more. Some players are already defensively inclined straight out of college you don't have to teach them much, but others you need to keep drilling to get the defensive effort out of them. These players are more accustomed to playing an offensive role on the teams they've played on, it doesn't come instinctually for them. I've seen Nate Robinson putting forth much more effort on defense playing as a Celtic than he ever did as a Knick, it points to pretty obvious coaching philosophy differences between D'Antoni and Rivers. I think the same could be said about Ray Allen compared to his days as a Supersonic.

Nate Robinson is another one. I remember Jeff Malone as another player that was traded and improved defensively.

Basically if the coach doesnt instill some sort of defensive philosphy in his teams its 100% om him. If MDA gets fired and JVG takes over this same roster do you really think we'll have as many defensive lapses as we do every game? No on your life.

Agreed 100%. D'Antoni has consistently refused to play Anthony Randolph who is probably our best rebounder off the bench in anything other than garbage minutes in blowout losses and yet he's running Timo Mozgov out there on a nightly basis who doesn't even know how to box out for rebounds. It just doesn't make any sense at all. I honestly don't see what he sees in Timo, to me he's pretty limited talent wise at the age of 24 I would expect his game to be a lot more developed than it is right now. Randolph has already shown flashes of brilliance at the age of 19 and 20 putting up impressive statlines along the way, I don't understand how you leave a guy like that on the bench while guys like Bill Walker and Timo Mozgov get burn. I also agree about his confidence being shot now, when you only get run in garbage time I don't see what anyone can expect to see out of any player, Anthony Randolph or otherwise.

You did not provide anything credible to support your points. No articles, numbers, or specific moments in a game.

Basically all your post says is your opinion = right no matter what.

For example:

When we were pointing out bad defensive teams that won a blue chip, we both worked with data.

In the end even though I provided the data I mis-interpreted and mis-presented it and I was pretty much wrong in that discussion. You took that data and presented it in a different way. You were right.

But there was data, proof, etc to show you were right.

In the above post that is lacking.

I thought it was obvious that I looked up the statistics. I mean I did go back to 1974 and referenced that. I'll provide links when necessary. But it wasnt an opinion it was fact...

Points Differential is the stat to look at here. Pace has no real bearing on this statistic, you can play uptempo but if you're giving up as many points as you're scoring it means you're not playing D. The top 5 teams in Points Differential averages this year are all top defensive teams in the NBA. The Knicks currently rank 15th in the NBA grouped in with midling teams like the Pacers, Rockets & Blazers. If the Knicks ever want to be an elite team they need to start playing much better defense point blank.

I played hoops as well, I understand sometimes guys need certain things hammered into their heads. But isn't all of that just even more indicative of the fact that it is more the personnel and less the coaching that has to deal with taking charges? Some people WILL just take charges, we are a team without a roster of guys who will take charges, to me that is indicative of player personnel. But again, as Blas states, this is all opinion.

Disagree. It can be instilled in these players. You teach it and practice it everyday it becomes second nature. By the way, doing anything in life everyday makes it become second nature. You do realize this I hope.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

My question is how do you know there isn't teaching? Are you in practice?

I dont have to be there. There is something called tangible results. Let me ask you this. Based on MDA's overall results since becoming a head coach who do you think is right? You or me? If an independent arbitrator looked at only our arguments and MDA's past results who do you think he'd choose? Get back to all of us on that one.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

By what metric has he never coached a good "defensive team"? I don't follow points allowed per game (though it is the standard measure for the clinically misinformed), I like points per 100 possessions. D'Antoni has us about in the middle of the pack, as I stated in another thread there are a bunch of teams packed in the middle with that stat, we are not incredibly worse than Atlanta in points per possession, a team with a much better defensive/rebounding front court than we have.

Right now we're have a defensive rating that puts us 21st. Thats below average. Oh, and middle of the pack is average not good.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

In his first full season with PHX, they were 17th in PA/100P (Points Allowed Per 100 Possessions), 16th in 2005-06, 13th in 2006-07, 16th in 2007-08. Those are his years with Phoenix. Am I going to say he is a top notch defensive coach? Of course not. But his teams were all pretty average, not piss-poor as many would have us believe. Admittedly, his last 2 years with NY were horrible on the defensive front per 100, but I find it really difficult to take any statistics or numbers (ANY of them) from those years without an enormous grain of salt.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

As you said, the blocks are nice, we get a bunch every game. Unfortunately there is no blocks per 100 possessions metric that I know of, but I bet we still would be we are at the top. I bet you would say it is the PLAYERS who have something to say about it, not coach.

Originally Posted by KBlack25

Coach would not have been impressed with a drive and the slam? Be serious...As a player you have to know what you can and cannot do. AR taking stupid jumpers is not a product of lost confidence, the kid was doing the same in the pre-season, before any long-term benching occurred. There was even a thread here in the preseason DEDICATED to AR's shot selection. Moz, on the other hand, has created a game around getting open under the hoop and trying (albeit poorly) to grab a rebound. You know what this tells me? The coaching staff has made it possible for a guy to get minutes while doing this.

AR needs to wise up. Maybe it's that stupid face he makes. Maybe it's the fact that when there is a huddle and Moz is first off the bench and involved and AR is starting at the camera, not paying attention. Maybe it's that he never ever looks happy, even if the team is winning. But I just think this kid, to me, seems like a big-time brat.

What this board breaks down to is that:

You (and others) are more likely to blame the coach for struggles, period.

I (and others) am more likely to blame the players for struggles, period.

Seriously Black. OPEN YOUR ****ING EYES! This cat comes in with a nice tight developing resume and gets benched. Not just bencehed FORGOTTEN. Why? Because he cant do what the coach likes adequately enough. Shot the ****ING THREE. Then when he tries to show the coach that he's been working on his outside game you say he needs to WISE UP. Technecally he's doing the smartesst thing he could do. Show the coach he's conforming to what he wants done so that he can get some burn.

[quote=KBlack25;158537]The two opinions are diametrically opposed, you will never convince me that a coach has more affect on the game than the players do themselves. Clearly, I will never convince you the players have more affect than the coach. I think that blaming a coach for struggles is as misplaced as giving him a ton of credit for success. If only some wise person had thought of and realized this idea previously:

If you admit that a team with more possessions will score more points per game, how can that mean that points per game is a good metric for the purposes of comparison across teams? The points per game stat is fundamentally flawed because all it tells is how many points a team scored in 48 minutes, does not adequately (or at all) factor in that teams may go to OT, inevitably scoring more points, does not factor in the pace, that a team may be getting a lot of quick looks, creating more possessions creating more points.

You admit that PPG does not factor in the fact that a team with more possessions (read: a faster game) necessarily will score more points. How, then, is that number not flawed? Sorry, I just can't seriously take opinions if you really buy that PPG is a good or relevant stat for comparison purposes.

Also, I am unclear as to how, when we win games, that we win them by an average of .4 points, as you assert?

You didn't read well enough KBlack. PPG in combo with point differential. When you take all the games we've played this seeason, our average win total is by less than a point. It shows a lack of consistent defense. If you scored 80ppg but held the other team to 70ppg, it shows that your're a horrible offensive team, but a consistently good defensive team. If you hold them to 79ppg then it indicates that you just play a slow system and can dupe people into that system, but are not a good defensive team.

And also note your defense is correlated to the amount of points you score. For instance if you score 100 per game and the other team scores 90ppg on average you are a good defensive team. But if you score 1000ppg and hold teams on average to 990ppg then you're not a good defensive team. You're prob the worst defensive team in the league, but you're the best offensive team to play a sport.

Disagree. It can be instilled in these players. You teach it and practice it everyday it becomes second nature. By the way, doing anything in life everyday makes it become second nature. You do realize this I hope.

Okay, but even by this you admit that it is the players' natural abilities, not the coach...The players haven't been instilled with this in the past, it's not like taking a charge should be calculus to these guys, it should be second nature. I blame the current state of BBall in the United States/Europe for this more than I blame the coaches. These players obviously weren't taught this in high school, nor in college when it should be a fundamental part of the game. To me it's an issue with players.

Originally Posted by Clyde & The Pearl

I dont have to be there. There is something called tangible results. Let me ask you this. Based on MDA's overall results since becoming a head coach who do you think is right? You or me? If an independent arbitrator looked at only our arguments and MDA's past results who do you think he'd choose? Get back to all of us on that one.

I think he would say I am right. Not only for the facts I am about to outline, but because of your admission that you don't care to learn as many facts about the team and establish the most-educated hypothesis possible about the coach/team.

Look at the guys MDA had to work with during the early part of his career with NYK. He had Crawford and ZBo for 9 games. He was hampered his coaching career with a bloated contract for a bloated Eddy Curry, a bloated contract for a bloated Jerome James. His "best" player never played and was out of the league the very next season (Stephon Marbury). His PG sucked, and while I thought he should have played Nate and Hill, these guys aren't world beaters on a good team. His actual best player was David Lee, who has seen a significant drop in numbers on a below .500 GSW team. The team that signed another big-minute guy, Al Harrington, is now desperate to get rid of him. Darko admitted he wasn't trying the early part of his career, and only when he got to Minnesota did he start trying. All we were trying to do for the last 2 seasons was make trades to get under the cap, it's VERY difficult to be relevant while you are doing that.

Once he actually got under the cap and got more of his guys in there (and if you think for one second STAT's anxiousness to sign here didn't have anything to do with the fact that his best seasons came under D'Antoni, I think you are crazy), through a bit over halfway through the season, he has us right where we should be based on talent. I will ask again: Are we better than Boston, Miami, Orlando, Chicago? We are maybe as talented as Atlanta, though their front court is better, but they have much more experience playing with one another. That leaves us at 6, I believe where our talent and experience as a team dictates we should be. If I told you at the beginning of the year we would be at the 6 seed and win 42-ish games (what we are on pace for), you wouldn't have been ecstatic?

Originally Posted by Clyde & The Pearl

Right now we're have a defensive rating that puts us 21st. Thats below average. Oh, and middle of the pack is average not good.

And I believe it is because we have below average defensive players on the whole...Again it comes back to whether or not you want to blame the coach or blame the players, a difference in opinion diametrically opposed. You will never convince me that the coach affects the game more than the players, I'm sorry but it's not something I am going to move from, just like you won't move from your stance that the coach is more responsible for on-the-court occurrences than the players. That's fine, that's your opinion. But that's all it is.

Originally Posted by Clyde &The Pearl

Seriously Black. OPEN YOUR ****ING EYES! This cat comes in with a nice tight developing resume and gets benched. Not just bencehed FORGOTTEN. Why? Because he cant do what the coach likes adequately enough. Shot the ****ING THREE. Then when he tries to show the coach that he's been working on his outside game you say he needs to WISE UP. Technecally he's doing the smartesst thing he could do. Show the coach he's conforming to what he wants done so that he can get some burn.

A nice tight resume? He played 33 games last year! Less than 100 on his career before showing up!

This isn't a case of killed confidence, the kid was terrible in the pre-season when he was playing for minutes. He got a good amount of time in early November as well. The fact is this kid's shot selection is awful. So much so that someone made a thread about it, and I believe I am in the thread saying he can contribute near the paint and rebounding, if he just narrows his game to that he will be fine, I have stated that over and over and over again. You really think MDA is encouraging a guy who clearly lacks a steady jumper to keep taking shots? You say he is a great offensive coach, why would he do that?

You keep saying all coach wants is the 3...then how do you explain Turiaf and Mozgov getting burn now? They have close to the hoop game. I promise you, if AR did what he was good at, rebounding, blocking/changing shots, and scoring close to the basket, the coach would find minutes for him. This kid's shot slection were suspect in the preseason (when he wasn't getting benched), in the early part of the season (when he was getting time) and is suspect now...and rather than stay involved in the huddle, he stares into space at the camera, unlike Mozgov who tried to get involved with the talks in the huddle. I don't know how much more evidence you need that this kid is NOT doing the right things even with the limited minutes he has. To me he has a choice, even in the small # of minutes he gets: continue to shoot Js and miss, or do what I know, and he knows, he can do, contribute on the defensive end, grab a ton of rebounds and score buckets near the hoop. If he does the latter, he will get minutes. But he continues to do the former.